On the Road to End Pig Pain: Knowledge and Attitudes of Brazilian Citizens Regarding Castration

Proposing a short version of the Unesp-Botucatu pig acute pain scale using a novel application of machine learning technique

Surgical castration of males is carried out on a large scale in the US swine industry and the pain resulting from this procedure can be assessed using the Unesp-Botucatu pig composite acute pain scale (UPAPS). We aim to propose a short version of UPAPS based on the behaviors best-ranked by a random forest algorithm. We used behavioral observations from databases of surgically castrated pre-weaned and weaned pigs. We trained a random forest algorithm using the pain-free (pre-castration) and painful (post-castration) conditions as target variable and the 17 UPAPS pain-altered behaviors as feature variables. We ranked the behaviors by their importance in diagnosing pain. The algorithm was refined using a backward step-up procedure, establishing the Short UPAPS. The predictive capacity of the original and short version of the UPAPS was estimated by the area under the curve (AUC). In refinement, the algorithm with the five best-ranked behaviors had the lowest complexity and predictive capacity equivalent to the algorithm with all behaviors. The AUC of Short UPAPS (89.62%) was statistically equivalent (p = 0.6828) to that of UPAPS (90.58%). In conclusion, the proposed Short UPAPS might facilitate the implementation of a standard operating procedure to monitor and diagnose acute pain post-castration in large-scale systems.

Future cattle production: Animal welfare as a critical component of sustainability and beef quality, a South American perspective

The demand for animal protein is rising, increasing pressure on animal production systems and ecological resources. Ethical and environmental concerns are also growing worldwide, pushing for more sustainable food production systems. The international scientific community has raised concerns about misinformation regarding meat production processes and their harmful impact on the environment, animal welfare and human health consumption. It is crucial to provide accurate information based on science, implement an active communication strategy, and foster collaboration across the meat supply chain to demonstrate that livestock farming is part of the solution to climate change and sustainability issues. As a fundamental pillar of sustainability, animal welfare plays a crucial role in this scrutiny. The "social license to farm" hinges on animal welfare issues and those related to climate change, the environment and biodiversity. Animal welfare is gaining relevance in the market of farm animals and their products, shaping a nation's standing in the international community. Considering the potential advantages of the Southern cone of South America production systems regarding sustainability and animal welfare, several countries prioritise them in their science, technology transfer, innovation, and public policy agendas. Scientific research indicates that implementing effective animal handling and welfare practices has a demonstrably positive impact on individual animal temperament, the quality of the human-animal relationship, overall productivity, and meat quality while reducing the risks of accidents. Caring for the welfare of animals is not only a moral imperative but can also be a business decision that benefits all stakeholders.

Public and industry knowledge and perceptions of US swine industry castration practices

In the United States (US), surgical castration of male piglets is typically performed without any form of analgesia. This may raise concerns with the public; however, there is no information regarding current public knowledge on swine industry practices in the US. In this study we gained insight into public knowledge and perception on castration with and without analgesia in comparison to knowledge of industry stakeholders on these same topics. Through an online survey, 119 respondents were asked four questions about castration in the US swine industry. Industry respondents were contacted via social media and networking. The general public sample was accessed through Mechanical Turk. Survey responses were categorised by experience (industry vs public). Industry respondents were more aware of practices compared to the general public. Most public respondents were unaware of castration practices and the lack of analgesia use. Respondents from rural communities were more aware of castration practices than (sub)urban communities and more aware of analgesia use than those from urban communities. Those with more education had greater awareness of castration practices (occurrence not frequency). Based on the results from this first US sample, knowledge on industry practices was especially lacking for public respondents, but also for a minority of industry respondents, indicating opportunities for education and further research on the topic.

Pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of grapiprant in juvenile pigs (Sus scrofa domestica)

Both pet and research pigs can suffer from some degree of pain from surgery, injuries, or osteoarthritis (OA). Despite this, there is a paucity of data on safe and effective analgesia agents in pigs. Grapiprant is an EP4 antagonist that blocks the action of the pro-inflammatory prostanoid, PGE2 . It has shown efficacy in attenuating pain associated with ovariohysterectomy and OA in dogs. However, there are no data regarding grapiprant in pigs. Therefore, the pharmacokinetic profile of orally administered grapiprant to juvenile pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) was evaluated in this study. Seven juvenile pigs received 12 mg/kg grapiprant orally. Blood was collected from an indwelling jugular catheter using the push-pull method at set timepoints up to 48 hours. Sample analysis was performed with high-performance liquid chromatography. Mean grapiprant plasma concentration was 164.3 ± 104.7 ng/mL which occurred at 0.8 ± 0.3 h. This study demonstrated that grapiprant concentrations consistent with analgesia in dogs were reached at this dosage in pigs. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of grapiprant in pigs.

Pigs' capacity to experience feelings and to suffer from tail lesion, ear lesion and lameness: Exploring citizens and pig farm and abattoir workers' knowledge and perceptions

The aim of this study was to gain insight into the perceptions of pig farm and abattoir workers as well as lay citizens regarding (1) sentience and (2) positive (intelligent and friendly) and negative (gluttonous, stubborn and dirty) attributes of pigs. We also aimed to investigate the (3) knowledge and perceptions of pig farm and abattoir workers on tail lesion, ear lesion and lameness in pigs and (4) the opinion of lay citizens regarding the likelihood of tail lesions, ear lesions, and lameness causing suffering in pigs and affecting meat quality. Chilean pig farm workers (n = 116), pig abattoir workers (n = 95), and lay citizens (n = 708) were invited on farm, at the abattoir and in public places, respectively, to participate in a survey. Answers were indicated using a 5-point Likert scale (0 = totally disagree; 4 = totally agree). Data were analysed using generalized linear models, including recruitment place and socio-demographic data as predictor variables. Female and lay citizens attributed pigs a higher capacity to experience feelings than male participants and pig farm and abattoir workers (p < 0.05). Lay citizens and workers recruited on farm described pigs as being more intelligent and friendly than those workers recruited at the abattoir (p < 0.001); recruitment place and sex were not associated with participants' perception regarding negative attributes of pigs (p > 0.05). Most lay citizens considered that tail lesions, ear lesions and lameness are likely to cause suffering in pigs and older participants had higher odds of agreeing that tail and ear lesions are likely to affect meat quality (p < 0.05). Finally, the risk factors for tail lesion, ear lesions and lameness pointed out by pig farm and abattoir workers is in line with what has been suggested by experts. Our findings contribute to understand the perception and values of all stakeholders regarding animal welfare, as it is crucial to improve the sustainability of animal production systems.

Consumers' Attitudes towards Animal Suffering: A Systematic Review on Awareness, Willingness and Dietary Change

Planetary and human health depend on Westerners' ability to reduce meat consumption. Meat production degrades the environment while excessive meat intake is associated with cancer and cardiovascular disease, among others. Effective reasons and motivations are needed for consumers to change their diet. The fact that modern animal agriculture inflicts a great deal of pain on animals from their birth to their slaughter, animal welfare/suffering may drive consumers to curtail their meat consumption. This systematic review examined a total of 90 papers to ascertain consumers' awareness of the pain animals experience in animal agriculture, as well as consumer attitudes towards meat reduction due to animal welfare. Results show that consumers have low awareness of animal agriculture. Awareness of animal agricultural practices and animal sentience is associated with increased negative attitudes towards animal suffering. Animal suffering due to farming practices, transportation, slaughter, and animal sentience are factors that may encourage a reduction in meat consumption, and even dietary change in the short term. There is also evidence that animal suffering may be a more compelling motivation for consumers' willingness to change their diet than for health or environmental reasons. Therefore, increasing consumers' awareness of animal suffering in meat production is paramount to contributing to reduced pressure on the environment and improved human health.

Animal welfare in Latin America: Trends and characteristics of scientific publications

The present study constitutes a review of the scientific articles about animal welfare in terrestrial farmed animals, published in 19 countries of Latin America. The main objectives were to quantify and characterize articles produced between 1992 and 2021 in farm animals' welfare using "Web of Science [v.5.32]" and "CAB Abstracts" databases. A total of 663 articles were found for the period analyzed, which were mainly in English (87%). The countries with the most publications were Brazil (43%), México (25%), Chile (12%), Uruguay (10%), Colombia (4%) and Argentina (2%). Cattle was the farm species most considered in the publications (41%), and the studies addressed mostly the on-farm production stage (76%). There was a rapid increase in the number of articles published in the last 15 years, accounting for 95% of the publications. This could be related to the publication of welfare standards by the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) since 2005, the creation of the Collaborating Center for Animal Welfare and Sustainable Livestock Systems-Chile-Uruguay-México in 2009, a Regional Strategy of Animal Welfare prompted by the WOAH in 2012 and the inclusion of animal welfare in the veterinary curriculum. The fact that most articles were in English shows that Latin American researchers have somehow overcome the challenge of publishing in a non-native language and their research can be read/cited worldwide. However considerable gaps in scientific productivity were identified in comparison to European and North American countries. Scientific research concerning the livestock industry in Latin America faces new challenges arising from the need to move toward more sustainable production systems within the One Welfare and One Health frame.

Waiting for markets to change me—High-stakeholders' views of antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance in pig production in Brazil

Overuse of veterinary antibiotics is a risk factor for antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which is a global public health emergency. More than 70% of the antibiotics consumed worldwide are used in farm animals, mainly in poultry and pig herds. Brazil is the fourth largest pork producer globally and the second-largest user of antibiotics in animals. Qualitative research can help understand the complexities around antibiotic use (AMU) in Brazilian pig herds and identify stakeholders' attitudes concerning the rational AMU and AMR in the production chain. This study aimed to explore the knowledge and attitudes of high-level professionals in the animal production chain about AMU and AMR in pig farming, the relationship with pig welfare and AMU in Brazil. We conducted 32 in-depth interviews with individuals active in the pig industry. The majority of the participants considered AMU excessive and inappropriate in pig farms in Brazil. However, attitudes toward a restrictive AMU scenario in Brazilian pig farms were predominantly negative, justified by economic, sanitary and social barriers. These included unsatisfactory management and biosecurity conditions in pig farms that, in their opinion, justify AMU to prevent diseases; issues surrounding prescription and acquisition of veterinary drugs; and employment and income relationships arising from the sale of antibiotics. The views of high-level professionals in the Brazilian livestock chain reveal antibiotics as a structural element that enables pig production. Antibiotics were viewed as essential resources for producing cheap food. Foreign markets were considered the most relevant driver of change in AMU practices rather than pressure from Brazilian consumers. A common belief expressed was that AMR is more associated with the inappropriate AMU in human medicine than in the livestock sector. Resistance to change in these stakeholders may hinder the implementation of future public policies to restrict the use of antibiotics in Brazil. Our findings suggest that successful measures to deal with the AMU/AMR challenges in the pig chain shall not be rooted in personal behavior change. Instead, honest interdisciplinary dialogues and structural changes are needed to define common grounds and a way forward to break the cycle perpetuating antibiotics as structural commodities.

International perceptions of animals and the importance of their welfare

Our perceptions shape our intentions, our motivations, our behavior, and in doing so, our reality. In this age of the Anthropocene, our perceptions also impact the lives and welfare of other animals. One of the key principles associated with the success of international animal welfare initiatives is an understanding of local audiences and contexts. Additionally, culture by country has been demonstrated to be a significant determinant of attitudes to animals and their welfare. Within this study, we surveyed 4,291 members of the general public on their perceptions of animals and animal welfare across 14 geographically and culturally diverse countries; Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, China, India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Sudan, Thailand, United Kingdom and United States. For many countries included in this study, this constitutes the first time research of this nature has been conducted. Most participants across all countries agreed that the welfare of both farmed animals and companion animals was important to them, and that laws that protect that welfare were also important. The notion that humans always care more for companion animals in comparison to farmed animals is challenged, as is the notion that care for the welfare of animals is a trademark of highly developed nations alone. It is proposed that the utility of the animals, and proximity by way of exposure are more significant than companionship in some countries, particularly those that are engaged with subsistence farming. Important differences exist by country, and the findings have been presented within the context of each country, for ease of incorporation into localized strategy where suitable.

Brazilians' attitudes to meat consumption and production: Present and future challenges to the sustainability of the meat industry

Brazil is a main global producer, exporter, and consumer of farm animal products. Information about the knowledge and attitudes of Brazilian citizens and consumers towards the different dimensions of meat production sustainability can support policy discussions and guide the industry to adopt production systems compatible with societal expectations. Here we provide a historical, social, and economic overview of meat production and consumption in Brazil, review the scientific literature on Brazilian public attitudes towards meat production and consumption, and discuss some actions Brazil is taking to develop more sustainable production systems. We show that Brazilians expect affordable meat products with high organoleptic, sanitary, nutritional qualities and produced under high ethical standards. The pace of discussions and changes in policies and in meat production systems needs to accelerate to follow domestic and international demands and the changes in ethical expectations of society. Constructive dialogue between all interested stakeholders, including citizens and consumers, needs to be fostered to design more sustainable meat production systems.

Linking Animal Welfare and Antibiotic Use in Pig Farming-A Review

Preventative measures, such as biosecurity and vaccinations, are essential but not sufficient to ensure high standards of health in pig production systems. Restrictive, barren housing and many widely used management practices that cause pain and stress predispose high-performance pigs reared in intensive systems to disease. In this context, antibiotics are used as part of the infrastructure that sustains health and high levels of production in pig farms. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global emergency affecting human and animal health, and the use of antibiotics (AMU) in intensive livestock farming is considered an important risk factor for the emergence and spread of resistant bacteria from animals to humans. Tackling the issue of AMR demands profound changes in AMU, e.g., reducing their use for prophylaxis and ending it for growth promotion. In support of such recommendations, we revise the link between animal welfare and AMU and argue that it is crucial to sustainably reduce AMU while ensuring that pigs can live happy lives. In support of such recommendations, we aimed to revise the link between animal welfare and AMU in pigs by analysing stress factors related to housing and management and their impact on pig welfare. In particular, we reviewed critical management practices that increase stress and, therefore, pigs' susceptibility to disease and reduce the quality of life of pigs. We also reviewed some alternatives that can be adopted in pig farms to improve animal welfare and that go beyond the reduction in stress. By minimising environmental and management stressors, pigs can become more immunocompetent and prepared to overcome pathogenic challenges. This outcome can contribute to reducing AMU and the risk of AMR while simultaneously improving the quality of life of pigs and, ultimately, maintaining the pig industry's social license.

"Mothers Should Have Freedom of Movement"-Citizens' Attitudes Regarding Farrowing Housing Systems for Sows and Their Piglets

Simple Summary

Housing systems with increased freedom of movement for the sow have been proposed to replace farrowing crates. However, increased piglet mortality by crushing is the main barrier to the adoption of loose systems. Although animal welfare is a socially constructed concept, no study has investigated public opinion about alternative farrowing systems. We investigated Brazilian citizens’ attitudes towards farrowing crates, loose pens, and outdoor farrowing systems, and whether the increased risk of piglet mortality by crushing would influence the acceptability of loose pens to replace the crates. Attitudes towards loose farrowing were more negative than those towards outdoor housing, and more positive than those towards crates, with only a minor change when increased piglet mortality was considered. Participants had concerns about the sows’ restriction of movement in the crates, which they considered cruel and unnatural, and considered outdoor farrowing as the closest to the natural life of pigs. Importantly, loose pens did not address all participants’ concerns about farrowing housing systems, especially socialization between sows and expression of maternal behaviors. Our findings indicate that the development of alternative farrowing housing systems is necessary, but it has to be in line with the public’s expectations to be socially sustainable.

Abstract

Farrowing crates are the most common housing for lactating sows throughout the world, despite known public opposition to housing systems that deprive animals’ freedom to move. This study aimed to investigate Brazilian citizens’ attitudes towards three farrowing housing systems (crates, loose pens, and outdoors). Data were obtained via an online questionnaire containing open- and close-ended questions. Participants’ (n = 1171) attitudes were most negative towards the crates and most positive towards outdoor farrowing, and positively correlated with perceived sows’ quality of life. Participants overwhelmingly rejected the use of farrowing crates, and most supported a proposal to move from farrowing crates to loose pens, even when informed that this entailed an increased risk of piglets’ mortality. Participants’ views were underpinned by concerns about sows’ freedom of movement, behavioral freedom and naturalness, and the belief that it is possible to develop and manage housing that prevents piglet crushing that does not involve confining the sow. Furthermore, loose farrowing pens may not fully address all concerns expressed by participants regarding farrowing housing, which included the possibility of allowing sows to socialize and express maternal behaviors. We conclude that maintaining farrowing crates may erode the pig industry’s social license.

Gene Editing for Improved Animal Welfare and Production Traits in Cattle: Will This Technology Be Embraced or Rejected by the Public?

Integrating technology into agricultural systems has gained considerable traction, particularly over the last half century. Agricultural systems that incorporate the public’s concerns regarding farm animal welfare are more likely to be socially accepted in the long term, a key but often forgotten component of sustainability. Gene editing is a tool that has received considerable attention in the last five years, given its potential capacity to improve farm animal health, welfare, and production efficiency. This study aimed to explore the attitudes of Brazilian citizens regarding the applications of gene editing in cattle that generate offspring without horns; are more resistant to heat; and have increased muscle tissue. Using a mixed-methods approach, we surveyed participants via face-to-face, using in-depth interviews (Study 1) and an online questionnaire containing closed-ended questions (Study 2). Overall, the acceptability of gene editing was low and in cases where support was given it was highly dependent on the type and purpose of the application proposed. Using gene editing to improve muscle tissue growth was viewed as less acceptable compared to using gene editing to reduce heat stress or to produce hornless cattle. Support declined when the application was perceived to harm animal welfare, to be profit motivated or to reinforce the status quo of intensive livestock systems. The acceptability of gene editing was reduced when perceptions of risks and benefits were viewed as unevenly or unfairly distributed among consumers, corporations, different types of farmers, and the animals. Interviewees did not consider gene editing a “natural” process, citing dissenting reasons such as the high degree of human interference and the acceleration of natural processes. Our findings raised several issues that may need to be addressed for gene editing to comply with the social pillar of sustainable agriculture.

Exploring Farmers' Reasons for Antibiotic Use and Misuse in Pig Farms in Brazil

Stressful management that makes farmed pigs susceptible to infections is associated with high antibiotic use (AMU) and resistance (AMR). Pig farmers are key stakeholders to support the international agenda pushing AMU restrictions. We interviewed 58 pig farmers on AMU/AMR, biosecurity, veterinary assistance, disease prevention and treatment, aiming to understand practices and attitudes towards the AMU/AMR problem. Farmers described a reliance on antibiotics to prevent and treat disease while neglecting biosecurity measures. We identified inappropriate AMU practices (high use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, incorrect dosage or treatment length) and unrestricted access to antibiotics, which encouraged imprudent AMU. Nevertheless, most farmers considered this AMU legitimate to guarantee herd productivity and showed unpreparedness and resistance to changing AMU practices, perceiving limitations (economic, sanitary and inspection) more easily than alternatives to reduce AMU. Agro-industries and foreign markets were mentioned, and internal consumers dismissed as potential motivators for behavioral changes. Importantly, farmers' economic, technical and social factors may limit their autonomy to change practices. We conclude that the observed distancing of pig farmers from the AMU/AMR problem limits the efficiency of policies aiming for a prudent AMU. Our study indicates a need for education, training and behavior change nudging that should include other stakeholders beyond farmers.

Meat Consumers' Opinion Regarding Unhealthy Pigs: Should They Be Treated with Antibiotics or Euthanized on Farm?

The aim of this study was to investigate the opinions of meat consumers (n = 1780) on on-farm management of unhealthy pigs, whether support for treatment with antibiotics varies according with chance of recovery, and the effect of knowledge on the use of antibiotics on these opinions. Most participants believed that the use of antibiotics was the best solution for unhealthy pigs, and this was associated with a low level of knowledge about antibiotics. Increasing the probability of recovery after treatment increased support for treating pigs with antibiotics. However, the majority of participants rejected the consumption of meat from animals housed in "hospital pens". After price, concern with food safety was the second main factor that influenced participants' choice when buying meat. Support for the use of antibiotics to deal with unhealthy pigs in "hospital pens", as well as for consumption of the meat from these animals, was higher among participants involved in agriculture. This shows that consumers are unaware of the potential negative repercussions for animal welfare associated with banning or reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock production, which is an important concern for the industry.

My pigs are ok, why change? - animal welfare accounts of pig farmers

Intensive pig production systems are a source of stress, which is linked to reduced animal welfare and increased antimicrobial use. As the gatekeepers of the welfare of the animals under their care, farmers are seen as the stakeholder responsible for improving animal welfare. The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge and attitudes of pig farmers towards pig welfare and the impact of such attitudes on farmers' selection of management strategies on the farm. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 44 pig farmers in one of the main pig producing regions of Brazil. Interviews covered knowledge and attitudes towards pig sentience and behaviour and welfare-related issues commonly observed in intensive pig farms (belly-nosing, fights, tail-biting, diarrhoea and castration without pain control) and farmers' conception and attitudes towards pig welfare. We identified many management and animal-based indicators of poor welfare, such as the use of painful and stressful management practices and use of environments that limit the expression of natural behaviours. However, most farmers were satisfied with animal welfare standards at their farms. Farmers' perceptions are aligned with their understanding of animal welfare. Although they identified all the dimensions that impact the welfare of a pig on a farm (affect, biological functioning and naturalness), their social reality, industry demands and available advice pushed them to perceive their range of action limited to biological and environmental aspects of the animals that do not necessarily benefit affective state. This precluded farmers from making associations between good health and the animal's ability to express a full behavioural repertoire, as well as from viewing abnormal behaviours as problems. The negative consequences for the welfare of the animals were commonly alleviated by routines that relied on constant use of medication, including high dependence on antibiotics. Expressions of estrangement from the production chain were common voices among the participants. This suggests that farmers may not be sufficiently informed or engaged in responding to consumers' expectations and commitments made by companies, which can pose a severe economic risk for farmers. The findings of this study indicate that economic, technical and social factors restrict farmers' autonomy and their ability to perform their role as stewards of animal welfare. (Re)connecting different human, animal and environmental interests may be a step to changing this scenario.